Daniel Townhead JP has an answer to what he thinks the meaning in life is. JV rejects the idea/question. To JV the mode of Being is what matters. Giving an answer to what the meaning in life is (something or nothing) can actually make you forget the importance of and how it is, to be in the right mode of being.
@@emiliodauvin5059 What is JP's answer to the meaning of life? I'm not at all sure that there is a clear one, and doubt that there is a distinct disagreement here.
Daniel Townhead you can spot it at how they reply to the question. JV likens it to asking what is north of the North Pole. JP goes on about suffering responsibility etc. sure no clear answer, but yet he tries to answer it.
@@emiliodauvin5059 But at many points in the interview JP makes the meaning relative, i.e. he has no set answer, and yet wants to give more of a clear response.
Sean Kuhn Some spend their time enveloped in thought on such subjects, that's really all it takes to generate ideas as these men do. Not to devalue any other person, of course. Others are more enveloped by their current physical and social surroundings, which is instinctual and necessary for everyone to an extent. This more reactive way of living adds value to society on a more personal level, and on a grand scale is just as important to the growth of our species as existential thought.
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247: My remark was meant to be facetious. I like what John Vervaeke has to say. But I think he still has a long way to go in following his own path. And by and large I base this assessment on his body language. Remember they are both Canadians and all North American males have a problem with machismo and their macho image.
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247: I'm english myself and I think we have far fewer problems with machismo than north american males. Though of course we are still very far from being perfect. I feel sorry for american women.
Holy crap, 2015. Great video, I love it when he talks about life in pragmatic terms and not so much about the postmodern neomarxist identity politics insanity.
My brain: "Hey man that was cool when we improvised some shit in that jam session." Jordan Peterson's brain: "You were actually engaging in a collective process of the spontaneous transmutation of patterns." My brain: "Yeah, that's what I meant."
Peterson "Le echa mucha crema a sus tacos" like we say in Mexico, to mean that he embellished too much his speech, John is more direct. Peterson is somewhat similar to Deepak Chopra, and I really don't mean this as an insult.
Wow, this discussion was soooo profound, how science should be, thriving to the deeper, and it is also showing JBP is a volcanic mountain in the sea, with much more substance under the surface as one expects and imagines. John is of the same caliber!
You know, I've discovered JP for about 9 months now. Ever since that day I have been reading and learning everything I can get my hands on. I'm doing this so I can do my best to live my limited mortal life in a manner that doesn't inflict any more harm on my environment (family, friends and everything else in a broader sense) than it is absolutely necessary. So I can live my life to the ultimate. So I can proudly present my life to God when I stand before the eternal Judge. I am quite young, I am only 24. But even after the countless hours I have been listening to JP, or John, I am still amazed by their ideas. And the fact that you are able to listen to these conversations is nothing but a miracle. Think about it! You're getting the thought that has been matured for 35 years on a silver plate! What an inestimable treasure is this? There are no words for it... Thank you for this video, I really appreciate it!
Beautiful way to put it. The internet allows us to have such freedom over how we spend our attention in our day to day lives. We can listen and read to brilliant minds that have pondered these questions their entire lives and come to understand their point of view. Voices like Jordan and John change lives in profound ways. I am forever grateful to them. Good luck on your journey.
@@paulwillisorg That's a merciless destruction of Harris' thought. I wonder how the man himself would counter that. Anyway, I'm admittedly too dumb to come up to my own conclusions on these complex issues, but my gut feeling was always that Harris was a much better salesman of ideas than an actual thinker
This is such an awesome display of the kind of conversation you can have when BOTH parties are striving for TRUTH. Absolutely riveting and edifying. Both Peterson and Vervaeke are incredible in erudition and intellect. They complement each other in the best possible way. Bravo!
After watching Peterson speak in many different discussion, I think I now understand why he talks so much. It's his way of assimilating and understanding what his interlocutor is saying. Teaching something is one of the best ways to test your understanding, and he developed a literal reflex based on this. Most people will introspect what they just learned, but he expels outward and his brain registers from the actual words he says. Quite fascinating.
1:07:00 Good point. I have myself gone for the "local" win multiple times and every time afterwards I notice I should not have done that. The point Peterson makes clarifies this a lot and I should be able to avoid this situation for good.
I deeply crave having this kind of conversation with someone. Most people don't care to go beyond small talk. In best cases, they listen to my viewpoints and reply something like: Oh, that's really interesting! I never thought about that!
Ludmila Marešová, have you checked discussion groups on Facebook? Try looking for groups discussing meaning of life. You may want to limit this to human life. This can be a life-long study.
Yes. As a stay at home mom of two special needs kids, I feel like my mind would melt without the without long form podcasts on intellectual topics. :) They give me a chance to exercise my brain.
12:05 Vervake's analogy of *how we extract meaning from events* (ie. Choose what to focus on) being similar to *how we select food and how it's then discriminated by our digestive system to extract nutrients and discard non-nutrients* made a lot of sense to me. Our bodies tell us what they need.
Vervaeke ... the finest mind on planet earth right now... Peterson... the second finest... what an utterly wonderful discussion... here's hoping Jordan is feeling better and that John gets to talk with him again soon. Respect from Wales.
Insane that this is for free. And so crazy to see this beautiful dance of ideas in front of such a blunt background. :D Insane minds, I highly recommend diving deep into both of their realms
The standard one ? Everyone's familiar with that. But once you are not around people, even some clay laying around will turn into a chair. And for the less emaphic folk, the more majestic choice would be numerous bones.
Thing is, many would say a beanbag isn't a chair. A seat is something you sit on, but a chair has four legs and a backrest. If it has no backrest, it's a stool. -- Only if you see a chair that's been damaged so that it has lost it's backrest, people will think of it as a defective chair rather than a functioning stool. -- Only only, if the chair is specifically modified to be a stool, then it will be thought of as having formerly been a chair or anyone who sees the modified chair will be none the wiser and assume it's a stool. The more you pull apart the semantics behind what anything is, the more you find that it exists as a thought rather than anything physical. Only, the reason you're about to think about chair is because the idea has emerged from experience in the physical world. "Chair" isn't just a personal thought someone might use to identify an object, it's a name everyone has implicitly agreed upon for means of communication. Chairs do not exist in the sense that we normally experience. "Chair" is a concept made for purposes of communication. It isn't in the physical world. It isn't just something in your head. It isn't just floating around in some extra-personal mindscape. If it can be said to be anything at all, we haven't figured out how to verbalize it and never will because the process is tautological. The process of language chasing its own tail. Chair is not a thing. Chair is. So one conclusion to the issue of what a chair is is that it's a trick question.
@@amanofnoreputation2164 Between poorer people, a proper chair will still be a chair, but amidst people who sit on beanbags it will be perceived as a more comfortable, hence of higher-status chair. It's not language chasing it's own tail - it's status description.
Well, like, yeah, maaaaan! If you think a chair is something simple.. well, then.. like.. good luck! And if you feel it is a complex complicated entity of the metaphorical framework.. well, then more power to you I say!
Seeking for truth is like digging for treasure. It’s hard work and cooperation shares its burden. All I see here is a cooperation that we should all strive for.
If I were John Vervaeke being so anxious and impulsive myself, I would find Jordan extremely distractful, like he's going to interrupt me at any moment and by then I would loose my train of thought, Kudos for John he's an artist and a sage.
The most brilliant thing I have ever had the pleasure to witness. It does not only define the state of consciousness you have to be in, in order to experience life as meaningful, but also gives us a hint, to where the path of meaning will guide us if we follow through and accept the responsibility. Enlightenment might be to high of a goal to reach for us and our illusioned society, but the path to enlightenment has the potential to transform the hell we are about to create into something closer to heaven. Thank you very much.
Thats Jung if we assume who came up with this and Heidegger... In effect, Vervaeke is more on the perceptual perspective and Peterson on introspective. Id even go as to say JP is introverted perspective and JV is extraverted perspective.
Does meaning exist? My masters thesis was based on Piaget. I asked myself does educating disadvantaged and seriously challenged kids make a difference in terms of enrichment. I consequently learned that transferring love was basically meaningful. I could explain in a descriptive way In my wanna be book. Thank you guys, a very complex exchange of ideas. What is truly amazing is to actually see that men can talk beyond what a woman can! Appreciation is at the essence of a thing. Recognizing,deriving sense. Connection brings value and that is why teaching was as rewarding as it was meant to be. Thank you for the Weber humor, It threads the whole together! Thank you Dr.Jordan B Peterson of your contribution to awaken conscience,the way to re birth of Souls,I think.
I love the fact they they are throwing witty jokes here and there. That makes the conversation extremely enjoyable to watch, as it encapsulates both utility and entertainment. 😌
57:47 Literally, "scientia intuitiva" translates from Latin to "intuitive knowledge". In Spinoza's philosophy, it refers to a direct, non-discursive understanding of the essence of things, which contrasts with more abstract or reasoned forms of knowledge. This intuitive grasp is seen as the highest form of knowledge, leading to a deep sense of joy and fulfillment.
What would happen if you saw a bird with a leather feather? Would it be just another tether? Or could you see it as your mether? When you found your voice you could ask James Joyce. Just eat a strawberry and ask Joyce Cary.
John unflinchingly and fully engaged while Jordan dives into discussing chaos and energetically punching a whole through meaning is what I want to be when I grow up.
JV makes JBP think hard and we are all better for it. JV showing his absolute class. Great to see these arguments articulated pre-AFTMC and After Socrates emerged.
it seems to me like jordan, when describing the 3 meanings of life actually did the flow diagram that john presented in his meaning series... the chaos is the too hard of a problem, the order is too easy of a problem (in which you have full control, stability etc.) and the mediator is the flow. Just something that came to mind
1:13:41 Vervaeke summary of the Meaning Crisis 1:34:30 Peterson's description of Milton's "Paradise Lost" and the Christian word: Logos 1:48:40 The Wisdom of what is right
55:37 A Moment of Performative Contradiction: Jordan Peterson says, "You shouldn't pick problems that are bigger than the ones that you can solve." And John Vervaeke, noticing this performative contradiction, replies, "I disagree with you on that; we are doing it right now!"
It's like two prophets conversing for the sake of their global audience of rational disciples ! Super Stuff... Thanks to both of them and to the uploader, too...
I just love how they both, JP particularly, keep trying to get a leg up in the conversation. Semi-seriously, of course, but still. Both are trying to pee on that tree at a higher level at each turn!
good stuff. I really want to listen to some of John's stuff now. I liked the points he made and was impressed at how gracious he was in letting Jordan ramble for so long. I really appreciate Jordan's philosophy, but he is incredibly verbose. John was much more succinct.
1:40:04 "This is a false dichotomy we have saddled ourselves with for too long. You cannot be a rational being if you are not a deeply emotional being... " "They are interdependent and equally interdefinning."
@46:40 the way jordan interrupts with that and then apologizes with that guilty look trying to hold back his laughter is just like a bad kid actin up in class hahaha #VERYRARE
Vervaeke nails it just before the hour mark: The perception of absurdity is a failure of perception. But there's more! While the meaning of life is that it stops, the meaning of existence is that it doesn't. So living limitedly well with others is existing infinitely well with all. Very, very good. Give that naked bully some cheezies!
The Romantic Pragmatist teams up with the Practical Idealist and hilarity ensues! The preacher from Alberta keeps getting on his high horse, like the hero / prophet we all know he needs to be, but who can hold him in his grandiosity and depression? It's the monk-ly adept and recovering humble-holic who steals the show with his infectious enthusiasm, rescuing his partner, the audience and even the show itself by “exemplifying” its meaning.
No man has outlined more imaginary triangles with his hands in a span of 2 hours than Jordan Peterson
William Meléndez fuck dude I spit out Dr pepper over this
Two words. JAY. Z.
William Meléndez, so what, if it makes him feel more comfortable and it’s not hurting anyone.
pyramid schemes are righteous after all.
@@notvadersson 😂😂😂😂
Best talk I've seen with Peterson. i looked for a long time for somebody to disagree with him in a meaningful way
What are Vervaeke's disagreements with him?
Daniel Townhead JP has an answer to what he thinks the meaning in life is. JV rejects the idea/question. To JV the mode of Being is what matters. Giving an answer to what the meaning in life is (something or nothing) can actually make you forget the importance of and how it is, to be in the right mode of being.
@@emiliodauvin5059 What is JP's answer to the meaning of life? I'm not at all sure that there is a clear one, and doubt that there is a distinct disagreement here.
Daniel Townhead you can spot it at how they reply to the question. JV likens it to asking what is north of the North Pole. JP goes on about suffering responsibility etc. sure no clear answer, but yet he tries to answer it.
@@emiliodauvin5059 But at many points in the interview JP makes the meaning relative, i.e. he has no set answer, and yet wants to give more of a clear response.
these guys are on such another level. I could follow that they were saying but I could never think of this shit on my own.
Sean Kuhn Some spend their time enveloped in thought on such subjects, that's really all it takes to generate ideas as these men do. Not to devalue any other person, of course. Others are more enveloped by their current physical and social surroundings, which is instinctual and necessary for everyone to an extent. This more reactive way of living adds value to society on a more personal level, and on a grand scale is just as important to the growth of our species as existential thought.
And the rest of society has to pick of the slack of people who contribute nothing, like ol' Glute Gains here.
Marduk Moredhel lol
It might please you that the fact that you can follow their conversation, makes you be on another level of the normal human intelect.
Besided Gaming I lol'd at the word choice you used to demonstrate your next-level intellect. "be". lmao
I think the world is ready for THE JOHN AND JORDAN SHOW
Ah! But when did John cross the Jordan?
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247: My remark was meant to be facetious. I like what John Vervaeke has to say. But I think he still has a long way to go in following his own path. And by and large I base this assessment on his body language. Remember they are both Canadians and all North American males have a problem with machismo and their macho image.
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247: I'm english myself and I think we have far fewer problems with machismo than north american males. Though of course we are still very far from being perfect. I feel sorry for american women.
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247: I hope you don't feel sorry for me.
It happened ! . J.p. podcast
John Vervaeke was my highschool Philosophy professor.
Lucky you
holy shit
Sounds like fun
He was a teacher for my 3rd year in uni called Philosophy of Psychology. Amazing class
no way! Lucky you!
Holy crap, 2015. Great video, I love it when he talks about life in pragmatic terms and not so much about the postmodern neomarxist identity politics insanity.
My brain: "Hey man that was cool when we improvised some shit in that jam session." Jordan Peterson's brain: "You were actually engaging in a collective process of the spontaneous transmutation of patterns." My brain: "Yeah, that's what I meant."
😁
Peterson "Le echa mucha crema a sus tacos" like we say in Mexico, to mean that he embellished too much his speech, John is more direct. Peterson is somewhat similar to Deepak Chopra, and I really don't mean this as an insult.
Wow, this discussion was soooo profound, how science should be, thriving to the deeper, and it is also showing JBP is a volcanic mountain in the sea, with much more substance under the surface as one expects and imagines. John is of the same caliber!
You know, I've discovered JP for about 9 months now. Ever since that day I have been reading and learning everything I can get my hands on. I'm doing this so I can do my best to live my limited mortal life in a manner that doesn't inflict any more harm on my environment (family, friends and everything else in a broader sense) than it is absolutely necessary. So I can live my life to the ultimate. So I can proudly present my life to God when I stand before the eternal Judge.
I am quite young, I am only 24. But even after the countless hours I have been listening to JP, or John, I am still amazed by their ideas. And the fact that you are able to listen to these conversations is nothing but a miracle. Think about it! You're getting the thought that has been matured for 35 years on a silver plate! What an inestimable treasure is this? There are no words for it...
Thank you for this video, I really appreciate it!
Beautiful way to put it. The internet allows us to have such freedom over how we spend our attention in our day to day lives. We can listen and read to brilliant minds that have pondered these questions their entire lives and come to understand their point of view.
Voices like Jordan and John change lives in profound ways. I am forever grateful to them. Good luck on your journey.
@@Raapadap I wish you the same, my friend!
this is the sam harris conversation i was hoping for
Meat Machine, you will, Meat, you will.
1:15:03 I was thinking the exact same thing.
Harris really is a sham. th-cam.com/video/wxalrwPNkNI/w-d-xo.html
@@paulwillisorg That's a merciless destruction of Harris' thought. I wonder how the man himself would counter that. Anyway, I'm admittedly too dumb to come up to my own conclusions on these complex issues, but my gut feeling was always that Harris was a much better salesman of ideas than an actual thinker
It's the Jordan Peterson Sam Harris conversation everyone was hoping for!
I hope to comprehend at least half of this after watching Vervaeke's Meaning Crisis lectures.
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247 why do you say that?
Lol
1 year has passed, how did it go?
+
This meaningful and significant conversation does afford people to participate in their lives in a meaningful manner.
This has affected me deeply and in doing so, altered my life. Thank you! :)
Adelle Ramcharan would u care to elaborate?
I'm very curious too.
This is such an awesome display of the kind of conversation you can have when BOTH parties are striving for TRUTH. Absolutely riveting and edifying. Both Peterson and Vervaeke are incredible in erudition and intellect. They complement each other in the best possible way. Bravo!
Almost 10 years later, yes, this is important.
this god damn brilliant, there's some profound ideas strewn throughout this talk.
After watching Peterson speak in many different discussion, I think I now understand why he talks so much. It's his way of assimilating and understanding what his interlocutor is saying. Teaching something is one of the best ways to test your understanding, and he developed a literal reflex based on this. Most people will introspect what they just learned, but he expels outward and his brain registers from the actual words he says.
Quite fascinating.
1:07:00 Good point. I have myself gone for the "local" win multiple times and every time afterwards I notice I should not have done that.
The point Peterson makes clarifies this a lot and I should be able to avoid this situation for good.
I'm impressed the host managed to ask 1 question
I deeply crave having this kind of conversation with someone. Most people don't care to go beyond small talk. In best cases, they listen to my viewpoints and reply something like: Oh, that's really interesting! I never thought about that!
I feel the same way, at work I feel like an island among a sea of simpletons. All they care about is sports and some silly show on TV etc.
Ludmila Marešová, have you checked discussion groups on Facebook? Try looking for groups discussing meaning of life. You may want to limit this to human life. This can be a life-long study.
Welcome to the world of "people who wonder" and "the rest"
Yes. As a stay at home mom of two special needs kids, I feel like my mind would melt without the without long form podcasts on intellectual topics. :) They give me a chance to exercise my brain.
Add ‘damn that’s deep bro ‘
12:05 Vervake's analogy of *how we extract meaning from events* (ie. Choose what to focus on) being similar to *how we select food and how it's then discriminated by our digestive system to extract nutrients and discard non-nutrients* made a lot of sense to me. Our bodies tell us what they need.
“We don’t see objects and infer meaning, we see meaning and infer objects”
Im going to have to think about that one for the next year or so...
Well... One year later?...
It's all debatable. On which level do we see?
That's actually _exactly_ what we do.
Vervaeke ... the finest mind on planet earth right now... Peterson... the second finest... what an utterly wonderful discussion... here's hoping Jordan is feeling better and that John gets to talk with him again soon. Respect from Wales.
Insane that this is for free. And so crazy to see this beautiful dance of ideas in front of such a blunt background. :D Insane minds, I highly recommend diving deep into both of their realms
it's interesting how I get the same sense of delight listening to this as I do when listening to moving classical music.
these guys changed my life in undergrad. legit CHANGED. MY. LIFE.
How?
Lucky.
How?
I appreciate the fact that an actual light-emitting truncated triangle is hovering over their discussion.
A really fantastic discussion, thanks.
"What is a chair? Well, that's a complicated question." .... classical one.
Went back to rewatch that, funny.
The standard one ? Everyone's familiar with that.
But once you are not around people, even some clay laying around will turn into a chair.
And for the less emaphic folk, the more majestic choice would be numerous bones.
Thing is, many would say a beanbag isn't a chair.
A seat is something you sit on, but a chair has four legs and a backrest. If it has no backrest, it's a stool.
-- Only if you see a chair that's been damaged so that it has lost it's backrest, people will think of it as a defective chair rather than a functioning stool.
-- Only only, if the chair is specifically modified to be a stool, then it will be thought of as having formerly been a chair or anyone who sees the modified chair will be none the wiser and assume it's a stool.
The more you pull apart the semantics behind what anything is, the more you find that it exists as a thought rather than anything physical. Only, the reason you're about to think about chair is because the idea has emerged from experience in the physical world. "Chair" isn't just a personal thought someone might use to identify an object, it's a name everyone has implicitly agreed upon for means of communication.
Chairs do not exist in the sense that we normally experience. "Chair" is a concept made for purposes of communication. It isn't in the physical world. It isn't just something in your head. It isn't just floating around in some extra-personal mindscape. If it can be said to be anything at all, we haven't figured out how to verbalize it and never will because the process is tautological. The process of language chasing its own tail.
Chair is not a thing.
Chair is.
So one conclusion to the issue of what a chair is is that it's a trick question.
@@amanofnoreputation2164
Between poorer people, a proper chair will still be a chair, but amidst people who sit on beanbags it will be perceived as a more comfortable, hence of higher-status chair.
It's not language chasing it's own tail - it's status description.
Well, like, yeah, maaaaan! If you think a chair is something simple.. well, then.. like.. good luck! And if you feel it is a complex complicated entity of the metaphorical framework.. well, then more power to you I say!
Seeking for truth is like digging for treasure. It’s hard work and cooperation shares its burden.
All I see here is a cooperation that we should all strive for.
I'm speechless. Almost. I was able to write this.
But you didnt say it. 😉
@@martinburrows6844 5 years later i am called out ...lol....u are right i didn't say it..
@@Philc2 😂 i came here after watching these two on j.ps podcast.
I’m going to have to come back to this one over and over again. There’s just so many ideas in here that deserve being thought about!
I love the moment when the moderator puts down his mic down and starts taking notes :)
"We are condemned to meaning." - Maurice Merleau-Ponty
THIS IS WHY I LOVE TH-cam
GREAT TALK
If I were John Vervaeke being so anxious and impulsive myself, I would find Jordan extremely distractful, like he's going to interrupt me at any moment and by then I would loose my train of thought, Kudos for John he's an artist and a sage.
The most brilliant thing I have ever had the pleasure to witness.
It does not only define the state of consciousness you have to be in, in order to experience life as meaningful, but also gives us a hint, to where the path of meaning will guide us if we follow through and accept the responsibility. Enlightenment might be to high of a goal to reach for us and our illusioned society, but the path to enlightenment has the potential to transform the hell we are about to create into something closer to heaven.
Thank you very much.
This is beautiful. Thank you for sharing.
A relaxed, rested Dr. Peterson.
February 2020 A 2015 Peterson; before exposure to the world.
@@TheShootist he looks drunk.
Outstanding. I am so grateful to both Jordan and John for their work and ability to share their work/minds.
This was a wonderful discussion. Thanks very much for posting.
Peterson: Science/reason = order. Intuition/the poetic = chaos. In harmony = meaning.
Vervaeke: Absurdity = absence/nothing/deficit. Insanity = presence/every-thing/surplus. In harmony = attention/mindfulness/wellbeing/meaning.
Thats Jung if we assume who came up with this and Heidegger...
In effect, Vervaeke is more on the perceptual perspective and Peterson on introspective. Id even go as to say JP is introverted perspective and JV is extraverted perspective.
Does meaning exist?
My masters thesis was based on Piaget.
I asked myself does educating disadvantaged and seriously
challenged kids make a difference
in terms of enrichment.
I consequently learned that transferring love was basically
meaningful.
I could explain in a descriptive way
In my wanna be book.
Thank you guys, a very complex exchange of ideas.
What is truly amazing is to
actually see that men can talk
beyond what a woman can!
Appreciation is at the essence
of a thing.
Recognizing,deriving sense.
Connection brings value
and that is why teaching was
as rewarding as it was meant to be.
Thank you for the Weber humor,
It threads the whole together!
Thank you Dr.Jordan B Peterson
of your contribution to awaken
conscience,the way to re birth
of Souls,I think.
Love that Jordan just can't contain the excitement at some points during this discussion. Very informative and entertaining video!
There should be an extended version of this discussion and put into a book, they need to write a book! Brilliant talk.
John Steed why? to indoctrinate more tools like them?
@@carlosivandegodoy Woah there nelly, where is that coming from?
This is pure gold.
I love the fact they they are throwing witty jokes here and there. That makes the conversation extremely enjoyable to watch, as it encapsulates both utility and entertainment. 😌
Oooh, I really liked this conversation!
I'm a long time admirer of Dr. Peterson. However, I found positive response in both men's arguments. Excellent podcast!
Awesome and meaningful! Thank both of you for this highly sophisticated talk!
This was great. I didn't know why I like jamming so much until now.
Or why I admire people who can do improv (linguistic).
Great discussions like this one help push both gentlemen to the bottom of things. I hope we see more of these.
Am I the only one that thinks JP looks and sounds insane? Absolute raving.
WoW thank you so much love the dance
Brilliant conversation. Thank you so much for sharing. 🍻
This is a good one! These two guys should talk more
i have watched and read and done a lot . but these guys are really rolling with it .
Lol “ok let me finish and I’ll let you hit the pumpkin.” Their banter is classy and respectfully. And quite funny at times.
at 1:12:35
john: I would put the deaCARTus before the horse
jbp: Is it the nietzsche horse.
57:47 Literally, "scientia intuitiva" translates from Latin to "intuitive knowledge". In Spinoza's philosophy, it refers to a direct, non-discursive understanding of the essence of things, which contrasts with more abstract or reasoned forms of knowledge. This intuitive grasp is seen as the highest form of knowledge, leading to a deep sense of joy and fulfillment.
Just discovered Vervaeke and thought to myself “Him and Dr. Peterson need to talk”
Only 6 years behind 😅
Thanks
1:19:53 a great short breakdown of what humor actually is.
John Ny, humor is a surprise.
What would happen if you saw a bird with a leather feather? Would it be just another tether? Or could you see it as your mether? When you found your voice you could ask James Joyce. Just eat a strawberry and ask Joyce Cary.
@1:41:10 gave me goosebumps. What a solid way to wrap up a conversation.
John unflinchingly and fully engaged while Jordan dives into discussing chaos and energetically punching a whole through meaning is what I want to be when I grow up.
"Let's not put the cart before the horse" - Jordan
"No, let me put Descartes before the horse!" - John
Brilliant.
JV makes JBP think hard and we are all better for it. JV showing his absolute class. Great to see these arguments articulated pre-AFTMC and After Socrates emerged.
it seems to me like jordan, when describing the 3 meanings of life actually did the flow diagram that john presented in his meaning series... the chaos is the too hard of a problem, the order is too easy of a problem (in which you have full control, stability etc.) and the mediator is the flow. Just something that came to mind
Really great minds. Learn so much from this dialogue. Thanks for posting it.
1:13:41 Vervaeke summary of the Meaning Crisis
1:34:30 Peterson's description of Milton's "Paradise Lost" and the Christian word: Logos
1:48:40 The Wisdom of what is right
How did this get past the censors? The content lives up to its title.
Thanks for posting, fascinating discussion.
Wow. Watched the whole thing start to finish. I wish my subconscious saw the valuable higher abstracted meaning in watching it again, however.
Ian Cunningham, u could just sleep on it, or meditate.
55:37 A Moment of Performative Contradiction: Jordan Peterson says, "You shouldn't pick problems that are bigger than the ones that you can solve." And John Vervaeke, noticing this performative contradiction, replies, "I disagree with you on that; we are doing it right now!"
Two of my favourite UofT Profs
i'm very proud to be at a university in a city that has these types of events frequently :)
Sasa Milic how frequently? What uni?
This belongs in a museum!
I'm glad that the depictions of psuedo-intellectual philosophical conversations as depicted in movies is super...duper...really...really...true.
It's like two prophets conversing for the sake of their global audience of rational disciples ! Super Stuff... Thanks to both of them and to the uploader, too...
I just love how they both, JP particularly, keep trying to get a leg up in the conversation. Semi-seriously, of course, but still. Both are trying to pee on that tree at a higher level at each turn!
The meaning of life is individual to each person
John and Jordan need a podcast. ... JBP as wasted in the political arena in which he was sentenced to do combat. This is where it's at
good stuff. I really want to listen to some of John's stuff now. I liked the points he made and was impressed at how gracious he was in letting Jordan ramble for so long. I really appreciate Jordan's philosophy, but he is incredibly verbose. John was much more succinct.
Adam Burgess Agreed!
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247 this is the third comment of yours I see in which you're shitting on John. What's the matter with you?
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247 my matter with you is that you seem to be biased towards hating John in pretty much all your comments
And im not shitting on you for having an opinion. What kind of response is "no, i'm not doing it, you're doing it" anyway?
@@kiranmcgoldrick4247 -2 IQ
Ah, nostalgia for when I was interested in Peterson.
Fantastic, thank you!!
Great conversation. Both have refined these ideas a lot in the last eight years. About 1.5 hours on did JBP start the 4 p’s?
when you're on the couch in your underwear about to get a snack and 27:41 happens
Was the snack, cheese?
Jordan was thiccer and happier here
@@themayqueen666 Cheeties
"MOOOMMM CAN YOU GET ME SOME CHEETIES I'M WATCHING JORDAN PETERSON"
This talk is brilliant.
What a great discussion, jokes and all
Jordan's use of body language and hand gestures gives the impression that he was destined to be a professor.
Overt Blowfish or a pizza cook.
Scholar’s cradle FTW.
1:40:04 "This is a false dichotomy we have saddled ourselves with for too long. You cannot be a rational being if you are not a deeply emotional being... " "They are interdependent and equally interdefinning."
Watching Peterson fumbling to assert his meaning upon reality is always entertaining.
Loved it to everyone involved.
This is fantastic
@46:40 the way jordan interrupts with that and then apologizes with that guilty look trying to hold back his laughter is just like a bad kid actin up in class hahaha #VERYRARE
And best mediator ever!!
Wow!!!! thank you
Amazing!
Vervaeke nails it just before the hour mark: The perception of absurdity is a failure of perception. But there's more! While the meaning of life is that it stops, the meaning of existence is that it doesn't. So living limitedly well with others is existing infinitely well with all. Very, very good. Give that naked bully some cheezies!
The Romantic Pragmatist teams up with the Practical Idealist and hilarity ensues!
The preacher from Alberta keeps getting on his high horse, like the hero / prophet we all know he needs to be, but who can hold him in his grandiosity and depression?
It's the monk-ly adept and recovering humble-holic who steals the show with his infectious enthusiasm, rescuing his partner, the audience and even the show itself by “exemplifying” its meaning.
Hank Roest ur dum
Hank Roest Why did you describe Jordan as a naked bully and depressed and grandiose?
Hey man! Nice going punching that strawman. Maybe some day you too can be a real boy.
Pretentious TH-cam comments on philosophy videos that are purposefully hard to understand to seem profound...
Prof Peterson's head-tilt causes water glass to slide. 19:36
Black Dubh insightful.
What was that lol
@@shinraholdings7281 god